Home Subscription Services
 
   

 
The International Journal of Prosthodontics
IJP Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Accepted Manuscripts
Submit
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitterYouTube
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: IJP
The International Journal of Prosthodontics

Edited by George A. Zarb, BChD, DDS, MS, MS, FRCD(C)

ISSN 0893-2174

Publication:
May/June 2010
Volume 23 , Issue 3

Back
Share Abstract:

Clinical Trial of Chlorinated Polyethylene for Facial Prosthetics

Sudarat Kiat-amnuay, DDS, MS/Rhonda F. Jacob, DDS, MS/Mark S. Chambers, DMD, MS/James D. Anderson, DDS, MScD/Rachel A. Sheppard, MBA/Dennis A. Johnston, PhD/Gilbert S. Haugh, MS/Lawrence Gettleman, DMD, MSD

Pages: 263270
PMID: 20552094

Purpose: Extraoral maxillofacial prostheses have been fabricated with silicone elastomer for 50 years with few improvements. The objective of this controlled, randomized, prospective, double-blind, single-crossover, multicenter, phase III clinical trial was to determine the noninferiority of chlorinated polyethylene elastomer (CPE) to silicone elastomer for fabricating prostheses. Materials and Methods: Forty-two patients were randomly assigned to wear a custom-made prosthesis fabricated from both materials for 4 months and asked to rate their satisfaction (0 = not satisfied, 10 = completely satisfied). Many other measures of prosthesis performance were investigated (see online appendices). Results: Of the 28 patients who completed the study, 68% had used silicone prostheses previously. Overall, patients rated the silicone prosthesis higher than CPE (difference: 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9 to 3.6, P = .017). Previous users had a stronger preference for silicone (difference: 3.3, 95% CI: 1.7 to 4.9, P = .001), while the 9 new users rated the two materials similarly (difference: 0.0, 95% CI: 2.1 to 2.1, P = 1.00). Conclusions: The noninferiority of CPE could not be established because of the early termination of the trial. Previous users of silicone prostheses preferred those made of silicone. However, new users expressed no preference between prostheses fabricated with the low-cost CPE or silicone. The authors have developed original clinical trial methodology for assessing extraoral maxillofacial prostheses. Int J Prosthodont 2010;23:263270.

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.
  © 2014 Quintessence Publishing Co Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog